From request to review
Identify the competent review route
For challenge misuse of public funds, record the requester, location, scope and responsible receiving office. The receipt identifies the clock and competent jurisdiction.
Gate: Location and competence are recorded
Owner: Court of Public AuditPreserve the original record
Assess public contract or payment reference; reconcile it with evidence of irregularity and source-protection needs. A missing document has an explicit alternative-evidence route rather than silent rejection.
Gate: Evidence is complete or an alternative is agreed
Owner: Court of Public AuditNotify parties with appropriate confidentiality
Ask Union Ombudsman for the finding within its own powers. The consultation records the specific unresolved question, evidence version and requested response.
Gate: A specialist finding is recorded
Owner: Union OmbudsmanObtain an independent finding
Publish or privately communicate the resolution, including dissent and consent limits.
Gate: The stated safeguard is resolved
Owner: Public Procurement & Supply AgencyCommunicate reasons and remedies
An independent audit referral and protected reporting route. The decision also names the accountable official role, effective event, conditions, review office and follow-up duties.
Gate: Reasons, conditions and review route are available
Owner: Court of Public AuditReview the finding and preserve access
Preserve the source record, decision reasons and conditions for challenge misuse of public funds. A service complaint routes to the Ombudsman; a contested legal restriction routes to the Union Court.
Gate: Follow-up owner and record custody are named
Owner: Union Ombudsman
Exceptions and alternate routes
Required evidence is unavailable
Record the missing item and propose a witness, existing register reference or independently verified substitute. The completeness review remains open.
Interplanetary communication is interrupted
Record local receipt time and the delegated action available. Preserve a mirrored log for later reconciliation; do not invent a remote approval.
An adverse finding affects the requester
Provide the finding, allow a response, disclose the review route and preserve essential service continuity where applicable.
Institutional interfaces
Investigates maladministration and gives citizens an accessible route to redress.
Provides legal cooperation, access to counsel and consistent recognition of decisions.
Purchases common goods transparently and develops resilient public supply arrangements.
Start the record
Prepare a requestThe assessment behind the stage diagram
Auditors separate allegation, verified evidence, expenditure finding and competent legal referral. The audited body responds without controlling the source record.
The transaction, source provenance and alleged departure from the authorised purpose define the matter. Protected source handling can be requested where disclosure creates a practical risk.
Possible decisions and what follows
An audit inquiry, reasoned finding, protected referral or documented closure.
Publish the appropriate finding and institutional response, preserving personal restrictions and the corrective follow-up.
Duties after the finding
Keep the scope accurate
Tell the receiving office about a material change in location, activity, operator, record custodian or requested result. The original receipt remains in the history.
Respect source custody
Provide purpose-specific references and authorised representations. Personal, clinical, commercial and protected scientific records have different access scopes.
Respond to a qualified finding
Read the conditions and the institution that owns them. A request for further evidence identifies the specific unresolved issue and the route for an alternative.
Preserve the follow-up
Publish the appropriate finding and institutional response, preserving personal restrictions and the corrective follow-up.
Disagreement, assistance and evidence alternatives
A completeness query names the unresolved evidence and the alternative the receiving office can assess. An administrative complaint concerns service handling; a legal appeal concerns a finding and its competent remedy. A public petition asks a representative institution to examine a wider issue.